and altering its structure, and doing what indicates his ownership. Therefore, it is necessary that it be given preference by this, just as it is given preference by possession. Indeed, it is possible for possession to be wrongful, occurring through usurpation, theft, borrowing, or leasing, yet that does not prevent preference being given by it.

Section: If one of them has a structure upon it, such as a wall built on it, a contracted arch supported by it, or a dome [or the like], it belongs to him. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i, because placing his structure upon it is in the position of possession established over it, due to his being the one who benefits from it. It functions the same way as having his cargo upon a beast or his crops in the land. Furthermore, the appearance is that a person would not allow another to build upon his wall. Likewise, if he has a screen (sutra) upon it, or if at the base of the wall there is a timber whose end is beneath a wall that one of them claims exclusively, or he has a vaulted arch (azaj) contracted upon it, then the disputed wall belongs to him. This is because the appearance is that the timber belongs to the one who is alone in placing his construction upon it; thus, the appearance is that the structure upon it belongs to him.

Section: If one of them has timber (wood) placed upon it, our companions said: The claim is not given preference by that. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i, because this is something a neighbor would permit, and a report has come prohibiting its prevention. According to us, it is a right for which permission must be granted. Thus, the claim is not given preference by it, just as it is not by leaning one's goods against it, or by plastering or decorating it. It is possible that the claim is given preference by it, which is the opinion of Malik, because he benefits from it by placing his property upon it, so it resembles the one who builds upon it or the one who plants in the land. The emergence of the Sharia with the prohibition against preventing it does not negate its being evidence of entitlement, proven by the fact that we have used its placement as evidence that the placement is entitled to permanence, to the point that when it is removed, it is permitted to be restored. Moreover, its being entitled requires the need for its placement, so in cases where there is no need, he has the right to prevent him from placing it. As for permitting it, most people do not tolerate it; for this reason, when Abu Hurayrah narrated the hadith from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), they bowed their heads in dislike of that, so he said: "Why"